Muslims & Human Rights

In the memories of most of us, Islam was no big player on the geopolitical
field. Our mental horizon after World War II was dominated, rather, by the threat
of Communism, and if we gave even a thought to international Islam back in those
days, it was certainly not in terms of grandeur. Even less in terms of danger.

Obviously, everything is changed now. At present we are distinctly aware of
the large presence of Islam on the world scene, and we think of that presence
very much in terms of danger. This is the case because over the past decade
and a half certain unusually bad persons have instructed us on the point, attacking
American embassies, troop barracks, both military and commercial ships, and,
more recently, even sites here in the homeland.

Consequently, during the nation’s present executive administration, we
Americans have done a thing hardly any of us could have imagined even twenty
years ago: sent forth armies to wage war, and to change the governments, in
two Muslim countries.

Now if we may say so, this kind of thing really does require some getting used
to. Whereas our wars against Nazism, Fascism, and Communism had seemed confidently
modern, going to battle against the armies of the Prophet strikes us as downright
medieval. Muslims? Goodness, aren’t they the ones who live in tents out
in the desert and ride on camels? Why beat up on people still living, not only
in the Middle East, but in the Middle Ages?

Until recently, in fact, when the fall of the Soviet Union and the changing
political faces of Asia and Latin America obliged us to mind our words more
carefully, we were accustomed to lump most Muslim countries into the “Third
World,” a category suggesting both poverty and powerlessness. For many
of us, the word Muslim was nearly a synonym for “simply out of
date.”

Nor was our impression of the matter altogether erroneous. The world of Islam
is very much out of date, in the sense that only a few Muslim countries
enjoy the greater benefits of modern life, such as self-government, liberal
institutions, and a coherent, free-market economy.

Muslim Facts

It is a fact that many of the world’s Muslims today live under theocracies,
tyrannical dynasties, and military dictatorships, and in spite of all the jokes
and other talk about “Arab money,” there is widespread poverty in
that part of the globe. Bernard Lewis (What Went Wrong?) cites a World
Bank estimate that “the total exports of the Arab world other than fossil
fuels amount to less than those of Finland.” With few exceptions (Malaysia,
happily), Islamic countries have not benefited much from that “worldwide
liberal revolution” documented in Francis Fukuyama’s The End
of History and the Last Man.

That is to say, Muslims would appear to be just the sort of people that generous
Americans would be more disposed to help, much as we have helped other impoverished
and oppressed nations over the years. For that reason, going to war with Muslims
would seem very strange indeed.

With respect to the invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq, spokesmen for our government
have announced, again and again, that America is not at war with Islam, but
with evil men who bolster their evil designs by appealing to the Muslim religion.
Although we believe these official protestations to be both sincere and correct,
it is useful to remember that our enemies see things very differently. As indicated
by their constant appeals to jihad with respect to the United States,
it is obvious that some Muslims do see the matter in religious terms.

In fact, this phenomenon of jihad is a clear symptom of Islam’s
current plight, because hardly anything seems so outdated as a religious war.
Whereas here in the West we were instructed, centuries ago, to render unto Caesar
the things that are Caesar’s and to God the things that are God’s,
classical Islamic theory recognizes no such distinction. Islam’s Sharia,
or Holy Law, is the basis of all law, and therefore of all political life.

Until some fairly recent experiments, there has never been a true separation
of State and Mosque, and even now the idea is odious to those very individuals
and groups around the world that wish us ill. As Bernard Lewis has suggested
in The Crisis of Islam, Muslims have still not entirely come to grips
with the loss of the universal caliphate after World War I.

Heaven knows, however, some Muslims today are really trying to do so, as witnessed
by their repeated efforts to establish “Islamic republics.” It appears
to us that most Muslim people truly want these blessings and are willing to
cooperate with the West in pursuit of them.

And as American Christians this is what we want for them as well. It is manifestly
in no one’s best interest that anyone else in the world should suffer
from poverty and oppression. Hence, it would be a great tragedy if our current
preoccupation with international terrorism should obscure in Christian hearts
the divinely imposed obligation to love our neighbors as ourselves.

For this reason also, plain and simple charity prompts us to applaud the toppling
of tyrannies, and it warms the heart to see those published pictures of busy
marketplaces, through which Afghan and Iraqi children walk to school, while
their elders begin national experiments in democracy and free economy. Indeed,
the widespread and spontaneous welcome given to American troops by the liberated
peoples of Afghanistan and Iraq argues that our friends in that part of the
world greatly outnumber our enemies.

A Continuing Problem

We take heart from that thought, because certain aspects of Islam suggest that
our relationships with Muslims may be worrisome for years to come. We are especially
burdened with two concerns: the ongoing persecution of Christians by Muslims,
and the continued recalcitrance to political reform within Islamic nations.
We may consider these in reverse order.

First, we believe that chronic resistance to political reform is the major cause
of the poverty and desperation evident among Islamic peoples. This assertion
defies, of course, the currently dominant theory that the “root cause”
of the social problems of the Islamic world is the State of Israel.

To us this latter theory seems entirely unfounded. It appears obvious, rather,
that the presence of Israel in the Holy Land, while it is certainly a cause
of great affliction to the people of Palestine, does not even begin to explain
the grinding poverty and despondency pervasive in other Muslim countries. No
one has sufficiently explained how the Sudanese, Turks, Libyans, Syrians, and
Iranians would be better off if there were no Israel. We see no reason to believe
that, if Israel were to disappear from the face of the earth today, we in the
West would be one whit safer from fanatic Muslims tomorrow.

It seems to us, on the contrary, that the State of Israel has served chiefly
as a limp excuse to exonerate those who are really responsible for the political
stagnation that endures throughout much of the Middle East. And this widespread
political stagnation, we believe, best explains the ongoing economic paralysis
prevalent in that part of the world.

Second, with respect to the Muslim treatment of Christians, we are once again
aware of how much our world has changed since yesteryear. It was not so long
ago that Communists were the chief persecutors of Christians. When we spoke
of “the suffering church,” we usually meant those who were oppressed
behind the Iron Curtain. In truth, that persecution was already beginning to
weaken, even before the Berlin wall came down, and now Christian missions are
thriving in countries where they were terribly oppressed during our youth.

So where are Christians being persecuted in the world at present? Chiefly
in places where militant Muslims have ready access to them: Pakistan, Nigeria,
Sudan, Egypt, Indonesia, Qatar, Bangladesh, the Philippines, and so on. Christians
are also persecuted by others, of course, such as Communists (China, Vietnam,
Cuba), Buddhists (Sri Lanka, Nepal), Hindus (India), and sundry oppressors in
places like Zimbabwe and Colombia, but by far the most sustained and consistent
persecution of Christians throughout the world continues to be inflicted by
Muslims. (In each edition of this journal, some of the more notable instances
of such persecution are chronicled in our section called “The Suffering
Church.”)

To be sure, not all of this Muslim persecution of Christians is government-sanctioned.
Nonetheless, we do believe that the problem itself should be approached as a
concern of civil rights. And the matter of civil rights again raises the problem
of political reform. It is reasonable to suppose that Christians living among
or close to Muslims—and truly all of us—will be safer if those Muslims
live in true democracies and enjoy, like ourselves, the benefits of liberal
institutions and economic prosperity.

A Sign of Hope

Germane to these considerations was the announcement of the Nobel Committee,
on October 10, that its prestigious Peace Prize was awarded to Shirin Ebadi.
The brief account of her life published by the committee at the time of its
announcement amply justifies its choice.

An Iranian lawyer and human rights activist, a compassionate champion of oppressed
women, exploited children, and neglected refugees, Shirin Ebadi represents a
profile of modern Islam that does not receive much notice over here. Until the
1979 revolution forced her to resign, she served as a municipal judge in Tehran
and has continued active in the Iranian legal system ever since. Moreover, she
is familiar with that system from the inside, so to speak, having several times
gone to prison for her advocacy of causes odious to the government.

Mrs. Ebadi is particularly noticed by Iranian authorities for her advocacy of
the families of writers and other intellectuals murdered in a society where
murder is sometimes a deliberate political strategy. Indeed, she still gets
threats from the Khomeinists, who see her as an enemy to Islam, but she goes
on insisting that “the age of rule by fear is coming to a close throughout
the world. So why should Iran be an exception?”

Mrs. Ebadi made that comment in an interview in Politique Internationale,
excerpted in The Weekly Standard. According to that source, she does
not aspire to political office. She remains, however, what the Standard’s
editors call “an alternative source of moral authority” in Islam,
arguing for the separation of Mosque and State, discovering a religious basis
for human rights in Islamic tradition, and pushing for political reform in the
still volatile nation that sits between Iraq and Afghanistan.

All men of good will are encouraged by the assurance that Mrs. Ebadi’s
humane voice resonates widely in her own country and that her views are esteemed
elsewhere in the world. If her compassionate ideals and progressive aspirations
come to prevail in Iran’s political life, we hope that they will continue
to further the fortunes of Muslims and alter the face of Islam.

Patrick Henry Reardon is pastor of All Saints Antiochian Orthodox Church in Chicago, Illinois. He is the author of Christ in the Psalms, Christ in His Saints, and The Trial of Job (all from Conciliar Press). He is a senior editor of Touchstone.

“Muslims & Human Rights” first appeared in the January/February 2004 issue of Touchstone. If you enjoyed this article, you'll find more of the same in every issue.

Letters Welcome: One of the reasons Touchstone exists is to encourage conversation among Christians, so we welcome letters responding to articles or raising matters of interest to our readers. However, because the space is limited, please keep your letters under 400 words. All letters may be edited for space and clarity when necessary. letters@touchstonemag.com